About your Search

20130107
20130115
Search Results 0 to 31 of about 32 (some duplicates have been removed)
, but the battle really is not lost. the american government, the obama administration's trying to do what it can to stabilize things, but it's lost a lot of influence with iraq with the departure of american forces, one thing the american forces did give the united states was more clout inside iraq. >> talk about the release of a man accused of killing american soldiers, this issue that you write about in your book, the end game, but also news that came out in november about the relief of ali musa; is that correct? >> guest: yeah. well, there's a number of events that i think worked against american interests in iraq, and the case you cite is one of them. he is not an iraqi. he's a lebanese-hezbollah operative who was sent into iraq at the best of the iranian's cud force because hezbollah is supported by iran for the purposes of training shiite militias fighting american troops. he was captured by leaders in a raid conducted by the brits in which there was an american presence held in detention by the united states, but then under the status of forces agreement, he was handed over to the iraqis.
-- the obama administration is trying to do what it can to stabilize things, but it lost a lot of influence with the departure of american forces. one thing that the american forces did get in the united states is more clout inside of iraq. >> host: talk about the release of a man accused of killing american soldiers. this issue that you write about in your book, "the endgame," but also some news that came out in november about the release of ali. >> guest: there's been a number of events that i think have worked against the american interest in iraq. that duke is one of them. she is an iraqi come he is a lebanese who was sent into iraq at the behest of the american courts because hezbollah is supported by iran. for the purposes of training of the shiite militia who were fighting the american troops, and he was captured along with a number of the shiite militia leaders in the rate connected in basra by the brits in which there's an american presence held in detention by the united states. but then under the status of forces agreement he was handed over to the iraqis. >> host: this agreement
the obama administration said correctly is let's collect the file together and put together a passport and review them to see who these people are. the task force was put together, then it got screwed up to start with because it took forever to put it up and it included every agency. match olsen was appointed director, lisa monaco was deputy assistant attorney general for what is it? counterterrorism. was his deputy. they had representatives from every agency from the cia defense intelligence agency, defense department. a very conservative, very conservative agency and there had to be unanimous opinion to clear anyone for release. they had -- all the agencies had to agree this person is not a threat to the united states and not of intelligence value. was extraordinarily careful, lugubrious, long process. many people who were not cleared have nothing on them but they couldn't come to unanimous agreement. very conservative people should be released. >> given the fact that yemen -- the kind of counterpoint to what was discussed is as you know the yemen prison system has been senior member
term how aggressive the obama administration will choose to be on antitrust issues. they've just confirmed a new head of the antitrust division, bill baer, and we have yet to know what sort of tone. they've been very aggressive. they've blocked several other technology cases. google's antitrust suit could without risk of hyperbole shape the landscape of the internet. because if google is not allowed to continue doing business as it does, it would change the understanding of the search market as it currently stands, and a sort of uninterested arbiter of links. it sees itself as an answers engine. essentially, they're offering consumers services they wallet. once the government starts defining markets on the internet, then they become again, you know, isolated, and there will be rules to them, and it will put barriers to entry for smaller companies, so it would have a far-reaching impact if they were to take some sort of action on the core question as brendan mentioned. what we saw, i think, was that a very sophisticated lobbying campaign by google, i think, on both sides of the ai
of the obama administration, perhaps there is some room for optimism on the national security front. i think there arlet of different pieces that make up this puzzle, that portrays a bad picture of america, and guantanamo is one piece of the puzzle. there's the question of indefinite, the programs, the military program and the cia program, impugn any for -- impugnty for torture, and pieces in the puzzle that in my view fit together to present a bad picture of america. so i'm hopeful that in the second term the administration will pull those pieces apart and clean them up and put them back together to make a better picture. but an important piece of that is guantanamo. my concern with guantanamo, makes a nice bumper sticker, close guantanamo. but closing guantanamo in my view, just creates a new guantanamo somewhere else unless you address the underlying issue of indefinite detention. i think some -- tom some some others are going to talk about is in detail, but last year on the mental anniversary there was a lot of media attention and press coverage about the tenth anniversary of guantanamo
of the obama administration, perhaps there is some room for optimism on the national security front. it portrays a better picture of guantÁnamo bay and this is one problem. there is the drone program, the military program and a cia program. impunity, torture, secrecy. wiretapping and all pieces in the puzzle as it presents a bad picture of america. i'm hoping we can pull those pieces apart and put them back together. the closing of guantÁnamo, in my view, creates a new guantÁnamo someone else must address the underlying issue of indefinite detention. on the 10th anniversary there was a lot of media attention and coverage about the 10th anniversary of guantÁnamo bay. you won't see it on google news and once you what to look for it. there is an op-ed in "the new york times". it talks about an evil that the military commissions were. so it's been very interesting over time watching this process and frustrating. i think closing guantÁnamo is the right step to take, but we also need to take a look at how we got guantÁnamo together. i don't know the bigger fiscal waste in guantÁnam
street ended the obama administration as i was carrying out my job at sigtarp and providing oversight. he warned me if i didn't change my tone up at her credibility to get a job after sigtarp, when i left government, presumably to get a job on wall street, but it seemed to him i wasn't interested in that. he said within the administration. if i change my tone, became her upbeat and positive, good things could happen to me. he mentioned perhaps an obama appointment as a judge if only i would change my tone. at the time and i heard the conversation, i thought it was being threatened or bribed to be honest with you. basically if you don't shape up, mr. camile ruin your entire career, but if you change your tune, good things can happen to you. later i realized he was explaining to me how washington works and what it means to be a regulator in washington and that means player punches, go with the flow and great things can happen, including a rich career on wall street, to speak your mind and be effective and you can do yourself real harm. c-span: herb allison, you describe came from merrill ly
another continuing resolution used to fund the government and the obama administration had not passed a budget and it was coming out. the republicans in the leadership believed that the own members voted against it. and the appropriations committee, which defined these resolutions and all others was insisting on a meeting with the leadership. we are cutting spending to record lows, and yes, these guys still are voting for us. we need to tell them to fall in line and speaker boehner said that we can't do that anymore. >> so the leadership doesn't feel like they are in a position to lead. on the debt ceiling or anything else? >> yes. whole books have been devoted to the debt ceiling and specifically, you know, the so-called grand bargain between speaker boehner and obama. it fell apart. a with all due respect to the authors of those stories and books, the bottom line is that speaker boehner never had the votes anyway. whatever deal he would have struck was with the obama administration and would almost certainly have failed and he would not have been able to get sufficient votes or he w
with the obama campaign over at the obama administration and? >> in 2008 on the obama campaign i was personal videographer for the first to have years of the white house. this last cycle did not work on the campaign formally, or at the white house but i worked in the new and strange murky world of super pacs and packs an independent expenditures. >> talk to us about the campaign. how did you get hooked up with the president? >> there was an ad in craigslist and that's not the case. right place right time. a friend of mine was working at cnn as a documentary producer. that's kind of a more normal path into politics. as much as i was interested i was a filmmaker. not first and foremost on anyone's list. she knew i was passionate and water to get involved and brought me. i headed off with the senator and started traveling inside the bubble. >> how long did you do it? was a 24/7 for a while? >> you know, essentially on the campaign it really felt like 24/7. i was technically living in chicago but i was there about two or three days a month. so it was pretty 24/7 budget scale back a bit at the whi
. well, this is an appropriate day, talk about regulating the disaster because last night president obama promised once more to develop the entity sources of the future. now, when any administration, republican or democrat, decides to develop energy projects, taxpayers had better watch out. governments get in the business of picking winners and losers which leads to cronyism and wasted taxpayer dollars. this is a question of industrial policy. whether the government should support business in new technologies that are unable to secure private funding. government appears to be worse at this and private, from the records we have over the past five years. in contrast, industries in california in may, mitt romney said, quote, the president doesn't understand when you invest like that in one solar energy company, it makes it harder for solar technology generally, because the scores of other entrepreneurs in the solar field suddenly lost the opportunity to get capital. who wants to put money into a solar company when the government puts half-billion into one of its choice? excellent question. a
the president over this and federal court to run into timber. and the obama administration appealed. what was fascinating as they went to the judge catherine after she gave her decision and the 112 page opinion which is a brilliant kind of deception on the destruction of the separation of powers and is worth reading and asked for an emergency stay meaning they wanted it back into the fact until the court would hear the case. she refused and they demanded an emergency hearing with the appellate court at 9 a.m. in the morning the next monday for an emergency hearing and an emergency stay which they got. the wally reason that i and the lawyers can make out that the obama administration reacted so aggressively is because they are already using it and probably on the pakistani u.s. gold nationalism. the inability to curb wall street, a close examination of the obama health care bill which was written by the corporate lobbyists and particularly with valor who worked for bachus and is now back into the industry. the inability to deal with those of the most important crisis that is confronting a
in the obama administration. since this discussion from december, the secretary announced she is leaving her post at the end of the president's first term. >> good morning, and welcome. we have a remarkable gathering of women this morning, and they are -- their personal stories and backgrounds are as varied as america itself. they come from los angeles and cleveland and baltimore. they grew up poor, not so poor, asian-american, african-american, hispanic, and white. each of them have one thing in common. they are all phenomenally successful. each rose to the top of their field, whether parts or politics or sports, and we are going to talk to them today about how they did it, ask them what the drive was, what kind of advice they have for younger people. we have one of the country's most respected tv journalists, an opera star, a physicist, youngest woman serving in the u.s. congress, a rock star ceo, and the most decorated figure skater in u.s. history. we are going to -- i want to welcome not only the people here in the auditorium of the "washington post" which is in downtown washington d.c.
understand the choices that law enforcement and the obama administration thinks and how they ought to deal with it. >> well, johnson, good to be here, and i want to thank brookings and appreciate being here with angela and michael. this remind me of the story, and i'm a country lawyer from colorado, but the guy who prayed to win the lottery ticket, just wanted to win over and over again and constantly asking the lord, you know, help me, help me, i lived a good life. i've never asked you for much, and years went by. hi never won. he said, help me, lord, i need the money. finally, the clouds part, and a voice comes down from heaven, sol, sol, meet me halfway and just buy a ticket. [laughter] you know, colorado and washington just bought a ticket. they bought a ticket to the lottery. we have to figure out if this is the lottery that's good or bad. if you don't like lotteries, and i respect some do not like them as all, can it be less than it otherwise might be? think about winners and losers if you will because when you design a lottery in a state or anywhere else, you are thinking about a wo
to the food stamp issue we pursued with the obama administration where we asked him to test the experimental project where we limited the use of the food stamp benefits for products that were clearly unhealthy and contributed to the obesity problem and higher health problems was more about health care and more about a health problem than about a sort of concerted an premeditated desire to influence people's behavior. the mayor is very devoted to and very committed to policies that improve the health outcome for families and people in the city of new york. it was something he absolutely believed in, and fought hard for. unfortunately the president and secretary of agricultural said no. it wasn't something they wanted to test or go through with the experiment with. i don't know that the bloomberg administration that that carries forward to many other places or ways. we want to encourage work. we think work is a key part of a individual's life and livelihood of the city. and it ought to be a prerequisite. it's called the supplement tal nutrition assistance program. and the use of the food stamp
. we did very little to stop them especially in 2010 under the obama's administration when they took a very hands-off attitude, basic a saying we are not really going to get involved in the outcome of the iraqi political debate. all week care about is having free and fair elections. to my mind, that is a mistake and it has proven to be a mistaken practice visits allowed essentially elements to seize power in iraq. it was not a mistake made by our forebears in the early days of the cold war. the true administration in the eisenhower administration did not take the attitude we don't care if communists come to power in france or italy or japan as long as they have fair elections. that's all we care about. that was not there today and that you are willing to do things such as covert funds and to those political campaigns which on some level might be seen as prejudicial to the interest of free and fair elections but they understood directly to be in the long-run interest of preserving democracy in most countries. i think we need to rethink some of the self-imposed checks we put on our beh
. the obama administration works from targeting unauthorized individuals to targeting employers since january of 2009, there are more than 8000 employers. it imposed about $88 million and a very significant departure from the past. there has been an increased effort in the labor enforcement we all know that it is all part of our enforcement system. therefore the department of labor has gone into more targeted enforcement on the books where there may be the department of labor has been increasing. i think of ice at the 19th 86 time was a philosophical time, i think students 50 years from now would definitely agree that it would be immigration history. it was a before christ and after christ moment. many know that congress decided to enact authorized immigrants and especially those in history. and it is an extraordinary unprecedented part of the criminal justice system. clearly unprecedented in history, i would also like to say it is unprecedented in any enforcement regime. i have summarized those that have been led with the trend, which we have also talked about. we used to make civil violatio
. it is a priority of the obama administration. he wasn't reelected. number one. number two, it's very popular in the united states. half of all american families gave money for haiti after the earthquake. every little town in america sent a group to work down there and have seen firsthand the challenges in haiti and have an appreciation for them, and are supportive of our help. there's broad bipartisan support, only congress, for haiti over the years. so while, you know, certainly secretary clinton and some of her aides have been very passionate about haiti, i think that will continue. you'll still be stuck with me by the way for a while. [laughter] >> any other comments or questions? okay, there's one over there and then i will turn it over for concluding remarks. >> thank you very much. and philips again. just a question. a lot of emphasis, not only in reports about eight to haiti and some of the failures, but in assistance to other countries, really emphasize the deficit of local knowledge on the part of internationals, americans who go there to help. with the best of intention. so it's ve
, but with the re-election of the obama administration it would seem it's pretty much off the table, you know, the five-year plan is already done for offshore. they don't seem to be showing any movement toward expanding ax excess. is there a deal that could be made there? how would it happen? >> well, a lot of questions there. let me try to remember them all and respond accordingly. first of all, there's lot of opportunity to change policy to encourage the development of u.s. resource. it doesn't have to occur within the administration. the lands act authority in the administration the congress could act. there is already -- talking about need to expand the potential opportunity. you have bipartisan support in the state of virginia, you have talk up-and-down the south atlantic and potential opportunity to look in the area, to develop the resources. you see the new chairman of the energy committee who is talking about a revenuing sharing proposal very early on with senator mor cow sky. these are significant shifts in policy that would allow for the responsible development of the nation's oil a
only happen with the needed change in this administration's chief economic policies. president obama has gotten his tax increases and now it's time for him and mr. lew, if confirmed, to focus on the need to cut spending. the other side of the president's so-called balanced approach to the debt reduction. we did have the nomination live on c-span. you can see it on the web site, c-span.org. this week >>> i think that collectivization of the minds of america's founding fathers is particularly dangerous because as i say so often in the book, they were not a collective unit, and presenting them as such intends to dramatically oversimplified the politics of the founding generation. and then as it comes to be used as a big battering ram to beat people over the heads with and they are incoherent and found. >> back to new york city now to hear from the world and 2013 festival hosted by the economist magazine. for ourin me discussion about capitalism in the world in 2013. beingom >> the director of the "economist," and jackson initiative on exclusive capitalism. that's where we are going to s
far apart in the post to any kind of security standard. that being said, the administration has threatened to implement a lot of fair legislation of the executive order. which includes negotiating leverage, and we also have reports that president obama issued a secret directive that address some of the administration and the private sector. regardless, we will see more action on cybersecurity coming out. it is still a difficult process. >> host: we go back to the secret directive. >> guest: it's very difficult to say. neutrality could be a big issue in the next year. they are considering the ftc's rules and accept the sec back to square one, whether it's a push in congress to enact a law, a possibility that i don't see the house republicans going for. >> host: tuesday the court making a decision and having neutrality on the. >> guest: if they uphold the rule, then they will be safe and i will be the standard now. whether the sec has the power regulate the services of the 21st century. >> host: another guess that we have today is eliza krigman. >> guest: thank you for having me o
with reuters. i've wanted to ask a question about apis relationship with the obama administration. i know, well, before the election, you said that it seemed like they were kind of being more, or reaching out more to the oil and gas industry compared to the start of the administration. are using more of that now that the reelection has happened, are you seeing that there's more outreach or that you're able to get your messages across to the administration? what are hearing from them? and then also i wanted to know, you talked about expanding, but with the reelection of the obama administration, it would seem like that's pretty much off the table, you know, the five year plan is already done for offshore. they don't seem to be showing any movement towards expanding access, so is there some type of deal i could be made or how would or how would that happen speak with a lot of questions. let me try to remember them all and respond accordingly. first of all there's lots of opportunity to change policy, to encourage the development of u.s. resource. it does and i'll have to occur within the administ
the obama administration's done a good job with the rebalancing on most of the aspects to it. they've done a lot of little things, and they tie them together with some good rhetoric and diplomacy. but the individual pieces of rebalancing are actually quite modest. and i'm glad for that, because i don't want to see us go towards excessive confrontation. in the sense that i think we have very strong allies in the region, we have a lot of economic b and strategic strengths that china does not have, for example, our population trajectory, for example the opennesses of our political system sw what that does to make the investment economy a haven for dollars. there are a lot of ways you can go down the list, and when you compare the two countries, you see a lot of american strengths that are enduring, and when you with mention our allies on top of that -- which dick did earlier -- there's no particular reason for us to think that we need to shrink back. but i would worry a lot about potential disputes that are unnecessary over issues like the islands. and let me give you one very concrete exampl
: thinks. i went to see the collaborate on how john brandon will meet the obama administration's received asian tilt and more importantly with the unrest in central africa, had the cia plans and tackling that. >> guest: good question. remember come the cia doesn't make foreign policy. the foreign policy team has decided to rebalance their focus on asia and obviously appropriately to focus on mali and in particular, which is a field state, where we have reason to believe this again is in the price, that a lot of terror organizations are grouping and training. the cia's role is only to provide intelligence about these parts of the world, not to make policy. i have worried over the years and adding that john brennan has, to, that too much of our intelligence practical. it focuses on who's coming up with the next hill on the battlefield. i think everybody gets it. most of afghanistan over recent years, how the wars are going to come out. it is a good idea to restore some of our focus on other parts of the world, including asia. i would hope that every bill and says the former policymaker and
. i would like to see a strong posture. i think the obama administration has been a doing a good job of rebalancing on most of the aspect. what do i mean by that? they have done a lot of little things and died -- tied them together with rhetoric and i'm glad for that. i don't want to see us go toward excessive confrontation. do i think apiecement necessary? no. and the sense that i think we have very strong allies in the region, we have a lot of economic and strategic strength china doesn't have. the population trajectory and the openness of the political system and what it does to make the american economy a haven for investment classer even though china is the top world manufacturer. there a lot of ways you go down the list. when you compare the two you can see the american strengths enduring and you compare the allies terrorist no reason for us to think we need to shrink back. i would worry a lot about the potential dispute unnecessary over issues like the islands. and let me give you one concrete example. it's not meant to be an inviation. if they do something dumb and seize one
real change in keeping haiti a priority. it is a priority of the obama administration and he was reelected, number one. number two, half of all american families gave money for haiti after the earthquake. every town in america has said the group to work down there and it seemed the challenges in haiti and have an appreciation for them and are supportive of our health. this broad bipartisan support in the congress for haiti over the years. so while sort of secretary clinton and some of her ease have been passionate about haiti, i think that will continue. you'll still be stuck with me, but the way, for a while. [laughter] >> any other comments or questions? okay, one of her daring than i will turn it over to blair for concluding remarks. >> thank you. match. just a question, in lot of emphasis not only in reports about eight to haiti and some the failures and assistance to other countries really emphasize the deficit of local knowledge on the part of international americans who go there to help with the best of intentions. so it's very difficult to practice local ownership of
and take steps to protect our industries from those unfair practices. the obama administration has levied some stiff penalties on the whole solar area but the fact is the horse is out of the barn on this issue. it is hard to see whether the industry will never recover from the damage done by those practices. >> host: henry e-mails i feel so disillusioned hearing what you have to say but as a consumer i feel like america has experienced such great progress and prosperity since the 50s when i was born. do you see america in decline or do we continue to improve in spite of ourselves? are you optimistic about america? >> i am decidedly pessimistic. we haven't touched on any of the books, but if you do any reading on the issue you can see this charge coming down the road and that is roebucks. for so long roebucks did one thing, punched a hole or fashioned a screw or something. now they do multiple tasks. once that takes hold this is going to result in the elimination of untold jobs and you can't complain because it is true productivity and like shipping stuff to china which is a giveaway to co
think the analogy to the food stamp issue that we pursued with the obama administration where we asked him to test and expand the project where we limited use of the food stamp benefits for products that were clearly unhealthy and contributed the obesity problem and contributed to higher health care costs, was really more about health care and more about a health problem than about a sort of concerted and premeditated desire to influence people's behavior. the mayor is very devoted and very committed to policy that improves the health outcomes for families and people in the city of new. this is something that he absolutely believed in and fought hard for. fortunately, the president, secretary of agriculture said no, it wasn't something they wanted to test. or even experiment with to be able to work. but i don't know that, at least from the bloomberg administration, that that carries for to many, many other ways. we definitely want to encourage work. we think work is a key part of an individuals life and livelihood in the city and they ought to be a prerequisite to receiving public assi
the messiness. help us understand the choices that the obama administration make and how you think out to deal with this. >> it's good to be here. i want to thank brookings and appreciating her with angel and michael. this whole thing reminds me of the story, i'm just a country lawyer from colorado, but the story of the guy who prayed to win the lottery ticket. he just wanted to win the lottery over and over again, and he was constantly asking the lord, would you help me? would you out of? i've lived a good life. i've never asked you for very much, and years went by come he never won the lottery. finally, he is down on his knees, help me, i need this money so badly. finally, the clouds part and a voice comes down from heaven, why don't you meet me halfway and just buy a ticket? >> guest: colorado and washington just wanted to get. about a ticket to the slaughter. now we have to figure out is this a can of lottery that will be good or bad. if you don't like lotteries, i respect some people don't like them at all, can this be a less bad lottery than it otherwise might be? think about the winners
from those kinds of unfair practices. the obama administration just in the last year has finally levied some stiff penalties in the whole solar area. but the fact is the horse is out of the barn on this issue several years ago. and it's hard to see whether or not that industry will ever recover from the damage done by those practices. >> host: henry in illinois e-mails in: i feel so disillusioned hearing what you have to say, and yet as a consumer i feel like america has experienced such great progress and prosperity since the 50es when i was born -- '50s when i was born. do you see america in decline, or do we continue to improve in spite of ourselves? are you optimist inabout america? >> guest: i'm decidedly pessimistic. one quick one, we haven't even touched, we didn't touch on any of the books. but if you do any reading, you can see this truck coming down the road, and that is robots. for so long robots did one thing, punched a hole or fastened a screw or something. now they do multiple tasks. and once that takes hold, this is going to result in the elimination of just untold jobs.
leadership of the obama administration. we were able to use the tools and save this individuals home. there are many other stories like that. we've got to personalize this. to me, the key to preserving homeownership in this country, the key to financial success, and i hope the major objective of the consumer financial protection bureau is to provide financial literacy. let people understand what is out there. let them understand their own capacity. let them understand the options that are there. financial literacy is critically important, and then access to financial products and services that are fair, affordable, and understandable. if we can take those steps we can help empower people to not only own a home or to make the right financial decisions, but to help build our economy. so i just urge you to be bold. when congress passed dodd-frank, when congress established the bureau, we wanted you to be bold because we don't want to repeat what we've seen over the last five years again. we want you to be bold in protecting families from abusive financial products, get rid of them. empo
and establish obama's legacy." the co-authors are both former fcc officials. reed hundt is the former chairman of the fcc in the clinton administration, and blair levin spent many years there, most recently as part of their national broadband plan, the executive director. gentlemen, thanks for being on "the communicators." mr. hundt, your book's subtitle, how can technology fix the budget and help us over the so so-of called fiscal cliff? >> guest: well, it is a the subtitle. it's a bit of a mouthful, but the fundamental idea here is if you spend time in silicon valley, if you spend time in detroit where the automobile industry is being rebuilt, if you spend time outside the beltway, you feel that america has the potential to generate abundance for it own citizens and for the world. if you spend time only inside the beltway, it looks like a zero sum game, it looks like lose/lose, and who's going to lose the most is the gist of the negotiation. so what we tried to say in this book is or what are the lessons of the technology sector, what are the lessons that come from the optimism in the techno
Search Results 0 to 31 of about 32 (some duplicates have been removed)